Trinity College Trinity College

Trinity College Digital Repository Trinity College Digital Repository

Senior Theses and Projects Student Scholarship

Spring 2013

For the Good of the Empire: The Basis of Decisional Thought at For the Good of the Empire: The Basis of Decisional Thought at

The Council of Niceae The Council of Niceae

Ian Waterhouse-Terrell Trinity College, Ian.waterhouseterrell@trincoll.edu

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalrepository.trincoll.edu/theses

Part of the History of Christianity Commons

Recommended Citation Recommended Citation Waterhouse-Terrell, Ian, "For the Good of the Empire: The Basis of Decisional Thought at The Council of Niceae". Senior Theses, Trinity College, Hartford, CT 2013. Trinity College Digital Repository, https://digitalrepository.trincoll.edu/theses/328

1

Ian Terrell Professor Frank Kirkpatrick

Professor Seth Sanders Religion Department

Senior Thesis Spring 2013

For the Good of the Empire: The Basis of Decisional Thought at

The Council of Niceae

“In hoc signo vinces,” In this sign you will conquer.1” It is this infamous

phrase that Emperor Constantine heard God say to him before the Battle of

Milvian Bridge where Constantine defeated his rival with an army a fraction of the

size of his opponent to become ruler of the Roman Empire. This “sign” that

Constantine saw, a combination of the Greek letters Chi (X) and Rho (P), was an

ancient Christian symbol that combined the first two letters in the name Christ2.

The legend continues, that after being spoken to by God, Constantine was

inspired to convert to Christianity, end the persecution of Christians, and make

Christianity the legal religion of the Empire3. As the new Christian leader of

Rome, Constantine called for and presided over the First Council of Niceae, a

1 "In Hoc Signo Vinces." Merriam-Webster.Com. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. 24 Apr.

2013. 2 Eusebius. The Life of the Blessed Emperor Constantine: From AD 306 to AD 337.

Merchantville, NJ: Evolution Pub., 2009. Print. 25 3 Speidel, M. P. "Maxentius and His "Equites Singulares" in the Battle at the Milvian

Bridge." Classical Antiquity 5.2 (1986): 253-62. JSTOR. Web. 24 Apr. 2013.

<http://www.jstor.org/stable/25010851>.

2

divinely inspired Council that unified all sects of Christianity in the Roman

Empire4.

It is impossible to prove whether or not Constantine actually saw the Chi

Rho in the sky, nor can it be said with certainty that the decisions that he and the

bishops of the Council of Niceae made were influenced by the presence of the

Holy Spirit. Yet, while we will never fully know the role that celestial beings

played in the decisions made by Constantine and the Council of Niceae, we can

look at the historical and political factors that affected the decision makers at the

Council and can argue that Constantine‘s political motivations impacted the

decisions that were made at the Council of Niceae. From historical and political

knowledge and perspective we can argue that the decisions involving Cristianity

that Emperor Constantine made, from the Battle of Milvian Bridge through the

First Council of Niceae, were made to increase the stability and security of the

Roman Empire, an Empire that had been plagued by civil wars and competing

emperors. However, before we can examine why Constantine made the

decisions he did at the Council of Niceae, we have to look at the state of the

Roman Empire before Constantine came to power, as well as explore the

decisions he made regarding Christianity while he was vying for sole power of

the Roman Empire.

In 285 CE, Roman Emperor Diocletian appointed his associate Maximian

as Caesar, or Junior Emperor, and a year later promoted him to Co-Emperor,

4 Rubenstein, Richard E. When Jesus Became God: The Struggle to Define Christianity

during the Last Days of Rome. New York: Harcourt, 2000. Print. 69

3

giving Maximian control of the Western portion of the Empire5. While officially the

Empire was still a single, unified empire, both Augustans would control separate

administrative offices and run separate militaries, effectively splitting the Roman

Empire into two different administrative states6. In 293 Diocletian further

expanded the Imperial regime by creating the Tetrarchy7, instituting a politial

system where two senior rulers, the Agustans, were assisted by two junior rulers,

the Ceasars8. Both Diocletian and Maximian appointed new Caesars on March 1

st

293, Constantius under Maximian in the West, and Galerius under Diocletian in

the East. The Tetrarchy did not formally split the empire, as all official legislation

was pronounced by all four of the emperors, but each emperor ruled from his

own separate capital city. The Tetrarchy was created to help create peaceful,

joint succession to imperial offices9. At first this worked fairly well. In 305

Emperors Diocletian and Maximian abdicated their thrones, making Constantius

and Galerius the Augustines of the Empire. Severus was appointed Caesar of

the West under Constantine and Maximinus was appointed Caesar of the East

under Galerius10

.

In 306 Emperor Constantius died in York while fighting to expand the

empire. Instead of Severus replacing the departed Constantius, Constantius’

soldiers pronounced his son, Constantine, to the title of Augustine. Constantine

5 Grant, Michael. The Roman Emperors: A Biographical Guide to the Rulers of Imperial

Rome, 31 BC-AD 476. New York: Barnes & Noble, 1997. Print. 209 6 Ibid 210

7 Ibid 203

8 Gagarin, Michael, ed. "Tetrarchy." The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Greece and

Rome. Oxford University Press. Web. 24 Apr. 2013. 9 Grant. 203

10 Ibid. 212

4

then asked Galerius, Emperor of the East, to validate his appointment. Galerius

refused to do this, believing Severus to be the rightful Emperor, but agreed to

pronounce Constantine Caesar of the West11

.

Constantine’s attempt to overrule the Tetrarchy and become Emperor of

the West inspired Maxentius, son of Maximian to pronounce himself the Emperor

of Rome. Emperor Severus and his army marched to Rome to quell Maxentius’

uprising. However, Maxentius offered his father the position of Co-Emperor if he

agreed to fight with him against Severus. Maximian agreed and many of Severus’

troops deserted him, returning instead to fight with their former commander

Maximian. Galerius, then attempted to defeat Maxentius and Maximian, the

father and son rulers, by marching into Rome in the summer of 307. However,

many of Galerius’ soldiers deserted his army and joined Maximian effectively

defeating Galerius12

. After his defeat, Galerius returned to the Eastern Empire

and appointed Licinius as Augustus of the West. That made it so Maximian,

Maxentius, Licnius, and Constantine all considered themselves legitimate

Emperors of the Western Roman Empire. While the father and son duo had

control of Italy and Northern Africa, Constantine still held control over the

Northwest portion of the Empire. In order to make peace with Constantine,

Maximian allowed Constantine to marry his daughter, Fausta and gave him the

title of Augustus, creating an alliance between Constantine and Maximian. In 308

Maximian attempted to overthrow his son and become sole emperor of the West.

This coup failed and Maximian was forced to seek protection under Constantine.

11

Ibid. 223 12

Ibid. 225

5

Two years later Maximian attempted to rebel against Constantine and failed.

After Maximian’s failed rebellion, Constantine strongly suggested that Maximain

kill himself, which he did in July of 31013

. Maximain’s death left Maxentius,

Constantine, and Licinius fighting for the title of Augustus of the West , with

Galerius still holding the title of Augustus of the East with Maximinus as his

Caesar.

In 311, Emperor Galerius, Augustus of the East, the one emperor who

held the most legitimate power, died14

. With Galerius dead, and with Licinius and

Maximinus distracted over which one of them was to become Galerius’

successor in the East, Maxentius declared war on Constantine. Constantine’s

army quickly progressed through Maxentius’ section of the Empire and was soon

outside of Maxentius’ strong hold in Rome by October 29th 312. At the battle of

Milvian Bridge, Maxentius’ last defense of Rome, Constantine attacked with an

army less than half the size of Maxentius15

. While Constantine’s army was much

smaller than Maxentius, “Constantine experienced a “Vision of the cross that

foretold his victory.16

” By October 29th Constantine had defeated his rival and

marched into Rome, the sole Augustus of the Western Empire17

.

It is at the battle of Milvian Bridge where we first see Constantine turn to

Christianity. While Constantine’s victory may have been divinely inspired, there

were also political advantages to entering Rome under the banner of Christianity.

13

Ibid. 212 14

Ibid. 222 15

Ibid. 226 16

Stephenson, Paul. Constantine: Roman Emperor, Christian Victor. New York: Overlook, 2010. Print.135 17

Grant. 228

6

While the Persecution of Christians had ended in 311 with a proclamation by

Galerius on his deathbed18

, Maxentius had allowed Christians to elect their own

bishop and had even returned land that was taken from Christians during the

Diocletian Persecutions19

. For the past several centuries Christianity had been

growing as a religion in the Empire, growing by around forty percent each

decade20

. Entering Rome under the banner of Christ gave the Christians of Rome

more reason to support Constantine as their new Emperor

As Constantine was taking control over the Western Empire, the Eastern portion

of the Empire had also sprung into warfare by August of 2013. In an attempt to

gain support from Christians in the Eastern Empire, Licinius co-mandated the

Edict of Milan with Emperor Constantine. The Edict of Milan stated that the

persecution of Christians must end21

. While both Licinius and Constantine had

stopped persecuting Christians in their respective portions of the Empire several

years earlier, Maximinus was still vehemently persecuting Christians22

. While the

Edict of Milan gained support from Christians in the Eastern Empire, agreeing on

the Edict showed Emperor Constantine’s support of Licinius (Licinius also

married Constantine’s sister at the same time in Milan23

) and shunned Maximinus

attempts to become Augustus. Soon after the signing of the Edict of Milan,

18

Ibid. 221 19

Ibid. 226 20

Ehrman, Bart D. The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings. New York: Oxford UP, 2008. Print. 501 21

Grant. 235 22

Ibid. 239 23

Ibid. 235

7

Maximinus died after being forced into excile by Licinius24

, giving the Roman

Empire two Emperors: Constantine in the West and Licinius in the East.

However, this peace between Licinius and Constantine did not last long and the

two Augusti engaged in battle on and off for over a decade. In 324 at the Battle of

Chrysopolis Constantine defeated Licinius becoming the first solo Emperor of the

Roman Empire in almost forty years25

.

In order to maintain the Roman Empire under his singular rule,

Constantine believed that he would have to settle the religious differences that

plagued the Empire’s newest and rapidly growing religion, Christianity. To

maintain unity of the Empire, Constantine believed that he must maintain unity of

the Christian Church. It was with that goal in mid that Constantine called the

bishops to meet at the first Council of Niceae. Constantine’s goal at the council

was to solve the major issues causing dissent among the different Christian

leaders throughout the Empire and create a universal, or Catholic, Christian

church26

. This paper will first look at the major issues facing the Council. The

latter part of the paper will explore the implications of those decisions and look at

why Constantine made the decisions he did, in his quest for a unified Church and

Empire.

One of the most divisive issues that the Council of Niceae dealt with was

the Arian divide27. While there were many different sects of the early Christian

church the largest divide was between the nature of the relationship between

24

Ibid. 240 25

Ibid. 229 26

Rubenstein. 69 27

Ibid. 64

8

Jesus and God. One group of Christians believed that Jesus and God were two

separate beings. They believed that, while Jesus was divine, he was not an

equal to God the father28. They believed he had a homoiousios relationship with

God, which means that he was of similar substance to God, but not the same

substance as God. They saw Jesus as more human and was a distinct and

separate entity from God, the Father. Those who believed that Jesus and God

had a homoiousios relationship were called the Arians, after their leader Arius29.

Arius was a priest who lived and preached in Alexandria, Egypt during the early

fourth century. Arius may have been ordained a deacon under Meletius of

Lycopolis30

(whose importance at the Council of Niceae will be discussed later in

this paper). When the Bishop of Alexandria, Peter, fled Alexandria during

Christian persecution, Arius stayed in Alexandria risking his life to help other

Christians. He was named a deacon when Peter came back from his exile, and

was promoted to presbyter in 311 by Bishop Achillas, Peter’s successor31.

Opposing Arius and the Arians were those who believed that Jesus was

both completely human and also completely divine, meaning that God and Jesus

were homoousios. As they believed that Jesus and God were of the same

substance, this made Jesus and God the Father divine equals32. The main

28 Jenkins, Philip. Jesus Wars: How Four Patriarchs, Three Queens, and Two Emperors Decided What Christians Would Believe for the next 1,500 Years. New York: HarperOne, 2010. Print. 35 29 “Homoiousian.” Oxford Dictionaries. Oxford University, n.d. Web. 27 Mar. 2013 30

Rubenstein. 37 31 Ibid. 52 32 “Homoousian.” Oxford Reference. Oxford University, n.d. Web. 27 Mar. 2013

9

proponent of the homoousios viewpoint was the Bishop of Alexandria,

Alexander33, who replaced Bishop Achillas of Aleandria.

The conflict between Alexander and Arius began after Alexander was

named Bishop of Alexandria. Shortly after Alexander’s appointment as Bishop

of Alexandria, he himself gave Arius control over the Baucalis Church34

, one of

the oldest and most prestigious parishes in Alexandria35

. This gave Arius

tremendous power in Alexandria. Alexander, as a newly appointed bishop, gave

a sermon on how Jesus Christ and God, the Father were divine equals. Arius

refuted this sermon believing that Alexander was preaching Sabellianism, a

heretical branch of Christology that believed that Jesus and the Holy Spirit are

different modes, or faces, of God. Arius condemned Alexander’s sermon stating

“’If’ said he, ‘the Father begat the Son, he that was begotten had a beginning of existence: and from this it is evident, that there was a time when the Son was not in being. It therefore necessarily follows, that he had his existence from nothing.36’”

Here we see Arius explaining what he saw as a fatal flaw in Alexander’s

sermon on Homoousian. Arius explains that if God had begotten Jesus, than

there was a time when Jesus did not exist, so clearly Jesus is a subordinate

entity to God, the Father.

Alexander originally ignored Arius’ message. However, Arianism quickly

spread throughout Egypt and much of North Africa. When Alexander learned of

33 “St. Alexander.” Oxford Reference. Oxford University, n.d. Web. 27 Mar. 2013 34 Rubenstein. Print. 52 35 McKenzie, Judith. The Architecture of Alexandria and Egypt, C. 300 B.C. to A.D. 700. New Haven, CT: Yale UP, 2007. Print. 36 Scholasticus, Socrates. The Ecclesiastical History. [Sl.]: NuVision Publications, LLC, 2007. Print. 6.

10

the spread of Arianism, he formally excommunicated Arius37. Though Arius was

excommunicated from the church, Arianism had already spread past Alexander’s

diocese, and simply excommunicating Arius could not, and did not, stop the

further spread of Arianism38.

Emperor Constantine, who had passed the Edict of Milan in 313, making

Christianity a legal religion of the Empire, wanted to keep peace between the two

sects of Christianity. Constantine, originally did not understanding the gravity of

the dispute was between Arius and Alexandria as he himself did not believe that

there was a big difference between the homoousian and homoousios theories.

Constantine, believing that the conflict betweeen Arius and Alexander could

quickly be solved, sent Bishop Hosius of Cordova to deliver a letter to both

Alexander and Arius telling them to come to an agreement on the nature of

Christ39

. However, after hearing from Bishop Hosius as to the depth of the divide

between Alexander and Arius, Constantine realized that the two men could not

simply settle their theological differences. With this knowledge, and with

Constantines’s overwhelming desire to create a unified Church, which he saw as

a way to strengthen his power, Emperor Constantine called for a Council to meet

in Niceae to settle this dispute40.

In early May of 325 bishops from around the Roman Empire started to

arrive at Constantine’s summer residence in Niceae.41

The council was held in

37 Ibid 6 38 Rubenstein. 46 39

Ibid. 50 40 Vasiliev, Alexander A. History of the Byzantine Empire: Vol 1&2, 324-1453, Unabridged. CreateSpace Independent Platform, 2012. Print. 19 41 Rubenstein. 72

11

the Constantine’s Judgment Hall, the largest hall of the palace with rows of

benches running through the length of the hall for all the bishops to sit42

. By early

June over two hundred and fifty bishops (the symbolic number of three hundred

and eighteen bishops was the official count of how many bishops were present)

had made it to Niceae and the Great Council began their deliberations marking

the start of the first universal, or Ecumenical, Christian council43

.

The first order of business covered by the Council was the Arian crisis

While Arius was at the council, because of his status as an excommunicated

priest, and not a bishop, he could not speak in the council chamber. However

many of the bishops present at the council supported Arius’ position and argued

for him on his behalf44

. Leading the Pro-Arian bishops was Eusebius of

Palestinian Caesarea, who gave the opening Panegyric of the Council45

. The first

steps in creating a unified church were to create a unified creed in which all

members of the church could agree. Both Arian supporters and anti-Arians

attempted to influence the creed to the exclusion of the other group. The first

creed that went in front of the Council was that of Eusebius of Caesarea. This

was the creed that Eusebius used in his own Parish46

We Believe in one God, the Father All-Sovereign, the maker of things visible and invisible; And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Word of God, God of God, Light of Light, Life of Life, Son only-begotten, Firstborn of all creation, begotten of the Father before all the ages, through whom also all things were made; who was made flesh for our salvation and lived among men, and suffered, and rose again

42 Ibid. 76 43 Ibid. 75 44 Ibid. 77 45 Ibid. 76 46 Bettenson, Henry Scowcroft., and Chris Maunder. Documents of the Christian Church. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2011. Print. 27

12

on the third day, and ascended to the Father, and shall come again in glory to judge the living and dead; We believe also in one Holy Spirit

47.

This was a creed that, while all members on the council could sign and

agree on, as it didn’t exclude the beliefs of either faction. Both the Arians and the

anti-Arians could agree that Jesus was begotten from the father with the Arians

believing that begotten meant that, Jesus came from God and therefore was

lesser than him. The anti-Arians took the word begotten to mean that because

Jesus came from God then they were the same48

. Before any bishop could

critique or change this creed, Emperor Constantine commended the Creed, and

said that the Creed reflected his own beliefs, but “suggested” that the Creed

include that Jesus and God were homoousios49

. The council then revised the

creed to look like this (changes to the first creed in italics):

We believe in one God the Father All-sovereign, maker of all things visible and invisible; And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father, only-begotten, that is, of the substance of the father, [Homoousios] God of God, Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten not made, of one substance with the Father, through whom all things were made, things in heaven and things on the earth; who for us men and for our salvation came down and was made flesh, and became man, suffered, and rose on the third day, ascended into the heavens, is coming to judge living and dead. And the Holy Spirit. And those that say ‘There was when he was not,’ and, ‘Before he was begotten he was not,’ and that, ‘He came into being from what-is-not,’ or those that allege, that the son of God is ‘Of another substance or essence’ or ‘created,’ or ‘changeable’ or ‘alterable,’ these the Catholic and Apostolic Church anathematizes50.

47

Ibid. 27 48

Davis, Leo Donald. The First Seven Ecumenical Councils (325-787): Their History and Theology. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical, 1990. Print. 60 49

Rubenstein. 78 50

Bettenson. 27

13

This creed clearly excluded the Arians by adding that Jesus and God are clearly

of the same substance making it so that Arians could in no way interpret this

creed in an Arian way. The final blow to the Arians at the Council was the

addition of an Anathema to the ending of the creed, formally excommunicating

those who believe in the Arian doctrine. The Council finalized the creed around

June nineteenth with about eighteen bishops opposed to the creed. Constantine

then threatened all who would not sign the creed to exile, resulting in all of the

opposing bishops at the council signing the creed, except for Arius, and two

bishops from Libya, Secundus of Ptolemais and Theonas of Marmarica, who

were promptly stripped of their titles and exiled51

.

While the Arian crisis was the major reason why the Council of Niceae

was called, it was not the only issue that plaguing the fourth century church.

Another issue in dispute regarded the date Easter should be celebrated. This

conflict began as early as the second century. Easter is the festival that

celebrates the resurrection of Jesus Christ52. Problems arose among early

Christians in determining how and when to celebrate Easter. The Synoptic

Gospels state that the Last Supper was a Passover Seder53, which is on the

fifteenth of Nisan in the Hebrew Calendar54. After dinner was had Judas betrayed

Jesus where he was put on Trial, and crucified on Preparation day (Friday), the

day before the Sabbath55

. The Gospel of John gives a different date of Jesus’

crucifixion, and therefore a different day for Jesus’ resurrection. The Gospel of 51

Davis. 63 52 "Easter." Oxford Dictionaries. OxfordDictionaries.com, n.d. Web. 3 Apr. 2013. 53 Matthew. The Harper Collins Study Bible. New York: Harper Collins, 2006. Print. 54 Leviticus. The Harper Collins Study Bible. New Work: Harper Collins, 2006. Print. 55 Matthew. The Harper Collins Study Bible. New York: Harper Collins, 2006. Print.

14

John states that Jesus was crucified on the day before Passover when the rabbis

would slaughter the sacrificial lamb56

. This would put the day of Jesus’ crucifixion

on the fourteenth of Nisan with Jesus rising on the Preparation Day. Those who

believed that the Christian Passover should be celebrated on the fourteenth of

Nisan, no matter what day it fell on, were called Quartodecimanists57

. This sect

believed that Jesus, like the Passover lamb, was sacrificed for mankind58

and the

fast of lent should end on the day that he was sacrificed59

. This practice was done

in the Eastern section of the empire but differed from the practice in the Western

section. Those in the western section of the church believed that the fast should

be ended only on Sunday, the day the lord was resurrected, this tradition having

been passed down from the Apostles60

. Irenaeus, Bishop of Lugdunum, became

the peacemaker in this dispute and was able to convince the bishops in the

Eastern part of the empire to follow the Apostolic Tradition that the fasting shall

only be broken on the Lords day61

.

Now that the church had decided that they were going to celebrate Jesus’

Resurrection, instead of Crucifixion, the church had to decide which Sunday they

should celebrate Easter on. It had been decided at an earlier council, held in 314

C.E. in Arles62

(located in modern day France), that all the churches in the Empire

should celebrate Easter on the same day, on a date decided by the Bishop of

56 John. The Harper Collins Study Bible. New York: Harper Collins, 2006. Print. 57 "Quartodecimanism." : The Concise Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. Oxford University n.d. Web. 09 Apr. 2013. 58 First Corinthian. The Harper Collins Study Bible. New York: Harper Collins, 2006 Print. 59 Eusebius, and Arthur Cushman McGiffert. The History of the Church. Stilwell, Ks.: Digireads.com Pub., 2005. Print. 113 60 Ibid. 114 61 Ibid. 115 62 Ibid. 228

15

Rome and sent out to all the other churches in the Empire63

. While the official

ruling was that the Bishop of Rome was to send out when Easter was to be

celebrated, it was never done in practice, and the day that Easter was celebrated

in Rome still differed from when Easter was celebrated in Alexandria.64

Several

groups of Christians in the Empire were determining the date of Easter, by

celebrating Easter on the Sunday after the Jews celebrated Passover, making

them dependant on the Jews for knowing when to celebrate Easter. Other

Christians were determining Easter on their own without consulting Jewish

doctrine65

. Thus, with the date of Easter still unresolved, it was agreed that the

dating of Easter would be decided at the Council of Niceae. While it had earlier

been determined that Easter would be celebrated on a Sunday the church still

needed to figure out the particular Sunday that all Christians would celebrate

Easter.

With the dating of Easter a major issue facing the Council, the bishops

reaffirmed the decision made at the Council of Arles that all churches in the

Empire should celebrate Easter on the same day. They elaborated on this

decision by stating that all churches that had formally determined the date of

Easter based on the Jewish date of Passover, must change their custom to that

of Alexandria and Rome who followed their own, non-Jewish based calendar for

determining Easter as the first Sunday after the first full moon following the spring

63 "Canons of the Council of Arles." Trans. GLT. Catholic University, n.d. Web. 10 Apr. 2013. 64 Davis. 68 65

Ibid. 68

16

equinox66

(unknown to the council, Alexandria and Rome, while calculating

Easter on a non-Jewish based calendar, the two centers of the church were

attempting to compute the first full moon after the spring equinox, however,

because astronomy wasn’t as exact as it is today Easter was still celebrated on

different days in the Empire and it took several centuries for the entire church to

have a unified date for Easter)67

.

A third major controversy discussed at the council of Niceae was the

Melitius Schism. This Schism began during the Diocletianic Persecution of 303

when Christians were forced to worship traditional Roman Gods or be executed68

.

Bishop Peter of Alexandria fled the city to avoid persecution,69

While Peter was

out of Alexandria there was no one to fulfill the duties of a metropolitan bishop in

North Africa. Melitius, the Bishop of Lycopolis, used this opportunity to usurp the

patriarch of Alexandria70

. During this period while Bishop Peter was in exile,

Melitius preformed all the duties of Metropolitan Bishop including, baptizing

converts, ordaining priests, and disciplining lesser clergy71

. In the spring of 306

Bishop Peter returned from his exile and formally excommunicated Melitius.

Around the same time Melitius was imprisoned by the Empire and sentenced to

hard labor in Palestine72

. While in Palestine Melitius didn’t hide his religion or

66 Bradshaw, Paul F., and Lawrence A. Hoffman. Passover and Easter: Origin and History to Modern times. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame, 1999. Print. 99 67 Ibid. 92 68 Frend, W. H. C. The Rise of Christianity. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984. Print. 319 69 Rubenstein. 36 70 Telfer, W. "Meletius of Lycopolis and Episcopal Succession in Egypt." The Harvard Theological Review 48.4 (1955): 227-37. JSTOR. Web. 27 Jan. 2013. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/1508406>. 228 71 Rubenstein. 37 72

Telfer. 229

17

repent, but acted bravely as a prison priest, giving communion to other prisoners

in Palestine. Several years later, around 311, Melitius was released from prison.

Meanwhile, Bishop Peter had been arrested, and was soon to be martyred73

. On

his return from prison many in Alexandria treated Melitius as a hero. Those

whom he had ordained when he had usurped the Patriarch were still loyal to

Melitius. These Melitians were vehemently against the power and wealth of the

Alexandrian church, and were against giving power to those who had lapses of

faith during the persecution. By the time of the Council of Niceae, over a decade

after Melitius had returned from Palestine, the Melitians were still fighting to have

their leader return as Bishop of Alexandria, and have his acts, and those he

ordained recognized as legitimate by the Church74

.

Thus the Melitius schism was an important issue the agenda for the

bishops at the Council of Niceae. Between the start of the schism and the

Council of Niceae, Melitius and his “Church of Martyrs” in Alexandria, had grown

to about twenty-eight bishops, who were fighting with bishops that were

appointed by Bishop Alexander, for control of parishes in Alexandria. The

Council voted to allow members of the Church of Martyrs to return to the church

and also agreed to recognize the ordinations that Meletius made. However, while

the church would recognize Meletius’ ordinations, the Council said that they must

cease exercising bishop functions in favor of those bishops who had been

73

Rubenstein.37 74 Ibid. 40

18

consecrated by Bishop Alexander. Bishop Meletius was told that he must return

to his seat of Lycopolis and couldn’t ordain outside of his jurisdiction75

.

After the church finished dealing with the major conflicts plaguing the

Empire They turned to creating a list of code of canon law that all members of the

newly created Catholic Church would follow. These canons dealt with the orderly

administration of ecclesiastical affairs. While the twenty canons are in no

particular order, they can be broken down into five different categories: Church

structures, the dignity of the clergy, the reconciliation of the lapsed, the

readmission to the Church of heretics and schismatics, and liturgical practice76

.

Dealing with Church structures were the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Fifteenth,

and Sixteenth Cannons produced by the Council77

. Canon Four went over the

proper way for bishops to ordain new bishops, stating that all the bishops in the

area should be present for the ordination of the new bishop, however if that is not

possible, than a minimum of three bishops must be present, and the other

bishops must send a letter affirming their approval of the new bishop.

Furthermore, in every region the ordination of the new bishop must be ratified by

the metropolitan bishop of the area78

(the Council later produced cannons that

further defined the roll of the metropolitan bishop). This helped unify the Church

so that all leaders of the Church would be in agreement on the new bishop who

was to be appointed and gave further power to the metropolitan bishops. The fifth

75

Davis. 68 76

Ibid. 63 77

Ibid. 64 78

Schaff, Philip, and Henry Wace. A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers

of the Christian Church: Second Series. New York: The Christian literature company;

1890. Print. 11

19

cannon states that bishops from one see are not allowed to accept or give

communion to laypeople or priests who have been excommunicated from other

sees. So that bishops could do their due diligence on why someone was

excommunicated, the metropolitan bishop shall host a bi-annual synod where

matters of excommunication could be discussed with all the regional bishops

present79

. This canon was most likely put into the creed with Arius and the Arians

in mind, so that Arius couldn’t secretly enter a holy see and continue preaching

his heretical doctrine. The Sixth Canon defines the role of the metropolitan

bishop saying:

“Let the ancient customs in Egypt, Libya, Pentapolis prevail, that the Bishop of Alexandria has jurisdiction over them all, since a similar arrangement is the custom for the Bishop of Rome. Likewise let the churches in Antioch and the other provinces retain their privileges

80.”

This canon, officially gives the Bishops of Alexandria, Rome, and Antioch

dominion over the other bishops located in their regions. This canon also

elaborated on the Fourth Canon agreed upon by the by the Council, stating that

the metropolitan bishop has veto power over the ordination of lesser bishops in

the region and if any bishop is ordained without the consent of the metropolitan

bishop than the bishop who does the ordination shall be excommunicated.

Furthermore the canon states that if several bishops oppose the ordination of a

new bishop than the choice of the majority vote will triumph. The Seventh Canon

recognized the status of the Bishop of Aelia (Roman Jerusalem). While the

Bishop of Aelia was still subordinate to his regional Metropolitan Bishop of

79

Ibid. 13 80 Ibid. 15

20

Casesarea, he was given a title of honor, recognizing the importance of

Jerusalem as the city where Jesus Christ was crucified81

. The Fifteenth Canon

disallowed deacons, priests, and bishops from transferring to different regions

and churches, thereby forcing them to stay attached to the Church in which they

were ordained. If a priest or bishop attemptsed to move to a different region, than

his actions in that region (giving the Eucharist, ordaining priests, etc.) were not to

be recognized by the Catholic Church82

. The Sixteenth Cannn forbids bishops

and priests from receiving other priests who have left their parishes. If those who

have left their original parishes refuse to return, then they must be

excommunicated. Canon Sixteen also states that a bishop will be

excommunicated and his ordination void if he is found ordaining a man who

belongs to a different parish, without obtaining the permission of the bishop from

his home parish8384

.

In these six canons we see the beginning of the organization and power

structure of the early Catholic Church. Priests and deacons controlled local

churches where the laypeople would go to worship. Presiding over these

churches was the local bishop who could not leave his church, nor take other

clergy from other bishops, nor receive those who had been excommunicated by

other bishops. Ranking above the bishops were the metropolitan bishops who

controlled diocese in the major cities of the Empire. These metropolitan bishops

approved the elections of their subordinate bishops and hosted the biannual

81

Ibid. 17 82

Ibid. 32 83

Ibid. 35 84

Davis 63

21

regional councils. Finally, ranking above the metropolitan bishops were the three

bishops from the major Christian centers of Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch, who

previously had power over other dioceses by tradition, were formally given

canonical power over the other dioceses in the Empire85

.

Canons One, Two, Three, Nine, Ten, and Seventeen dealt with the dignity

of the Clergy86

. The First canon forbids those who had voluntarily castrated

themselves to remain or become members of the clergy. Those who had been

castrated because of health reasons or had had his genitals removed during

violence were allowed to stay in the church or be admitted to the clergy87

.

Eunuchs, commonplace during antiquity, “had a bad reputation around the

empire for immorality and political intrigue.88

” The second canon regulated the

ordination of those who had recently converted to Christianity. In several areas

of the empire converts were baptized and then quickly, sometimes immediately,

ordained to the priesthood. The council determined that a convert needs to have

a longer trial after their baptism before they could be ordained to the priesthood.

Those who had been quickly promoted to the priesthood, if found unworthy of

their title, were to be removed from the Church89

. The Third Canon disallowed

members of the clergy from living with a woman, with the exception of their

mother, sister, aunt or other females who were “above suspicion.90

” This only

applied to those bishops who had committed themselves to celibacy. At the

85 Ibid. 64 86

Ibid. 65 87

Schaff. 8 88 Davis. 65 89

Schaff. 10 90

Ibid. 11

22

Council of Elvira around 305 C.E. (located in current day Granada, Spain) the

Western segment of the Church had decreed that all:

“Bishops, presbyters, deacons, and others with a position in the ministry are to abstain completely from sexual intercourse with their wives and from the procreation of children. If anyone disobeys, he shall be removed from the clerical office.

91”

In the Eastern segment of the Church at the Council of Ankara (Modern

day Turkey) in 314 CE the Council created a canon stating that:

“They who have been made deacons, declaring when they were ordained that they must marry, because they were not able to abide so, and who afterwards have married, shall continue in their ministry, because it was conceded to them by the bishop. But if any were silent on this matter, undertaking at their ordination to abide as they were, and afterwards proceeded to marriage, these shall cease from the diaconate.

92”

The Third Cannon produced by the Council of Niceae only applied to

those priests located in the Western Empire, and those priests in the Eastern

Empire who had agreed to celibacy at their ordination. This canon did not apply

to those clergymen in the Eastern Empire who had forewarned their consecrating

bishops of their intent to marry. The Ninth cannon dealt with the examinations of

those wishing to be ordained priests. The Church, believing that its priests must

be held to a higher standard, decreed that all who are to become priests must go

through proper examination, and if crimes and sins are discovered during their

examination than that person shall not be ordained93

. The Tenth Canon decreed

that those who had lapses is faith during the persecution must be removed from

91 "Canons of the Council of Elvira." Trans. GLT. Catholic University, n.d. Web. 10 Apr. 2013. 92 Wace, Henry. "Council of Ancyra (A.D. 314)." Newadvent.com. Trans. Henry Percival.

Ed. Philip Schaff. Web. 24 Apr. 2013. <http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3802.htm> 93

Schaff. 23

23

their positions94

. The Seventeenth Canon forbids members of the clergy from

committing usury95

.

While the Tenth Canon decreed that those in the clergy who lapsed in

faith during the persecution must be removed from clerical office, the Council

also created four cannons dealing with laypeople that had had lapses of faith

during the persecution. The Eleventh Canon of the Council gave instructions as

to how someone who had lapsed in faith, without having his life threatened, could

return to the Church. Those who truly wished to repent would first need to spend

three years with the hearers, (those who were allowed to listen to the church

service, but only from outside of the assembly) and then spend ten years as a

prostrator, (one who was allowed into the confines of the church but had to leave

before the Canon of the Mass). Finally those who had lapsed would be required

to attend the entire liturgy for two years without the benefit of receiving the

Eucharist. After the lapser had gone through the above steps, only then they

were to be re-admitted to the Church96

.

Canon Twelve is in response to the members of the Roman military who

had left the military, but then returned and fought under Licinius, against

Constantine. Those who rejoined the military were required to spend three years

as hearers and ten years as prostrators before readmission. However, if the

local bishop believed that the soldier was truly repentant, then the bishop could

shorten the soldier’s period of repentance to just the three years as a hearer

94

Ibid. 24 95

Ibid. 36 96

Ibid. 24

24

before readmitting them to the church. The Thirteenth Canon stated that those

who were in a period of repentance, but were on their deathbed, were allowed to

receive the Eucharist. However Canon Thirteen notes that if the person were to

make a recovery, they could not receive the Eucharist in Church97

. The

Fourteenth Canon regarded the catechumens (those who were studying to be

baptized) who lapsed in faith. The lapsed catechumens were required to spend

three years as hearers before being allowed to return to their status of

catechumens98

.

While the canons listed above were used to give guidelines for those who

had had lapses in faith, the Council was also charged with how to properly

readmit those who followed heretical branches of Christianity into the apostolic

church. In the Eighth Canon, the Council explaims how the Novantianists, or

Cathari, are to be readmitted to the church. The Novantianists were a schismatic

group of the early Christian Church that was founded in the middle of the third

century. The Novantianists believed that those who had lapses of faith during

the persecution by the Roman Empire were not to be administered the Eucharist,

believing that those who lapsed were not worthy of the sacraments. The

Novantianists believed that the lapsed should show repentance but should not

expect re-admittance from the priests, as God was the only one able to forgive

sins99

. The church was able to accept the Novantianists back into the Catholic

Church fairly easily because the Novantianists didn’t have any theological

97

Ibid. 27 98

Ibid 31 99

Scholasticus, 32.

25

differences from the Apostolic Church100

. The clergy of the Novantianists were to

be readmitted to the Church and were to be allowed to remain in the clergy if

they acknowledged the teachings of the Catholic Church, specifically Canons

Eleven through Fourteen, which focused on re-admitting the lapsed to the

church. The Novantianists were allowed to keep the clerical rank that they held

as long there was no Catholic bishop who already held claim to their see. In

areas where both a Catholic and Novantianists bishop existed, the Catholic

bishop would keep his rank and the Novantianist would take the title of

“Chorepiscopus,” a rural auxiliary bishop101

. The Nineteenth Canon of the Council

dealt with the Paulianists, a heretical group that followed Paul of Samosata. The

Paulianists believed in adoptionism, meaning that Jesus was not divine, but a

human being who had been adopted, at his baptism, to be God’s son102

. Paul of

Samosata taught his followers that:

“…The Union between Jesus and the Logos [God the Father] was not an ontological one, but was analogous to the union between the Christian and the ‘inner man’ or between the prophets of the Old Testament and the inspiring Spirit

103.

Because the Paulanists held a different view on the nature of Jesus Christ

than did the Catholic Church, the Council determined that the baptisms of the

Paulanists were invalid and all Paulanists must be re-baptized. As the baptisms

of the Paulanists were invalid, the ordination of their clergy was also invalid. The

Council determined all Paulanist clergy members shall be examined by a

100

Davis. 66 101

Schaff. 19 102

Ehrman. 501 103

Pelikan, Jaroslav. The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine.

Chicago. University of Chicago, 1971. Print. 176

26

Catholic bishop, and if deemed acceptable, will be allowed to oin the Catholic

clergy104105

.

Finally, Canons Eighteen and Twenty dealt with liturgical matters. “The

Eighteenth Canon states that deacons are subordinate to both priests and

bishops, and therefore cannot receive the Eucharist before the bishop or priest,

and certainly cannot administer the Eucharist to someone ranking higher than

them. Furthermore, the Canon decreed that deacons are not allowed to sit with

the priests during the service. Any deacon who refused to follow this decree was

to have his rank of deacon stripped from him106

. The Twentieth Canon stated that

between Easter and the Pentecost those in the service should pray while

standing, as apposed to praying while kneeling107

.

On Around August twenty-fifth 325 C.E. the Council of Niceae finished its

work. The Council had created one unified Church creed, had found solutions to

the Easter debate, had solved the Meletian schism, and had created twenty

canons for the newly created universal Catholic church for the newly Christian

Empire108

.

“For that which has commended itself to the judgment of Three hundred bishops cannot be other than the doctrine of God; seeing that the Holy Spirit dwelling in the minds of so many dignified persons has effectually enlightened them respecting the Divine Will,

109”

104

Schaff. 31 105

Davis. 67 106

Schaff. 38 107

Ibid. 42 108

Davis. 69 109

Scholasticus. 26.

27

The quote above is an excerpt from a letter that Emperor Constantine sent

the Church of Alexandria after the Council of Niceae had concluded, informing

the community about the decisions made at the Council, that so gravely affected

the city. At the end of the letter we see Constantine claiming that the Holy Spirit

entered the minds of all three hundred bishops present at the Council and

imposed God’s will at the Council. While Constantine can claim that the decisions

made at the Council were divinely inspired, all the decisions made at the Council

held major political implications for Constantine, as well as for many of the

bishops that had been present at the Council. Most of the motivation behind the

decision-making at the First Council of Niceae was made for political gain, not

divine inspiration.

Even before the bishops came together in Niceae, political motives were

at play The Council was originally to be held in Ankara, however at the last

minute Emperor Constantine changed the location of the Council from Ankara to

Niceae110

. While the official reasoning for changing the location of the Council

was the fresh air, beautiful lake, and large meeting space at the Imperial Palace,

more thought went into decision to change the location than just how Idyllic the

setting was. The Bishop of Ankara was Marcellus, a well-known bishop who was

considered even by his fellow anti-Arians to hold extreme views. If Constantine

were to host the Council in Marcellus’ diocese it would seem as if the decisions

of the Council were predetermined in the anti-Arians favor. Constantine, who was

playing host to the Council of Bishops, decided that it was his right to hold the

110

Rubenstein. 68

28

Council at his summer home without the threat of favoring one religious faction

over another111

. Furthermore Theognis, Bishop of Niceae, while being

moderately Arian, was not influential throughout the empire and would not be

able to use hosting the Council in his jurisdiction to his advantage112

.

As previously stated, the largest conflict that the Council of Niceae faced

was the Arian Crisis. The Arian Crisis was the primary reason that Constantine

called for the Council to meet. Constantine personally didn’t have an opinion on

the Arian Crisis and didn’t fully understand the issue between the two

theologies113

. However, what Constantine hoped, was for the Council to create an

agreement among the fighting bishops that would lead to a unified Church, a

unified Empire, and a new era of Peace114

.

As noted earlier, the first attempt to create a unified church creed was

presented by Eusebius of Caesarea, who offered his own church’s creed as one

for the entire Church. Eusebius’ creed had loose enough language that both

Arians and anti-Arians could agree to it. However, Constantine believed that if

the bishops were left to their own devices, Eusebius’ creed most likely would be

struck down115

. Constantine feared that because Eusebius’ creed lacked clear

language favoring either the Arians or anti-Arians, it was too weak to pass in a

vote by the bishops and too weak to unify a divided empire. Thus before it was

111

Ibid. 69 112

Ibid. 69 113

"The Council of Nicea." The Council of Nicea. Columbia University, n.d. Web. 18 Apr. 2013. 114 Ibid. 69 78 115 Grant, Robert M. "Religion and Politics at the Council at Nicaea." The Journal of Religion 55.1 (1975): 1-12. JSTOR. Web. 27 Jan. 2013. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/1202069>.

29

put to a vote, Emperor Constantine intervened. While praising the creed and

saying that it reflected his own beliefs, Constantine urged the bishops to agree to

Eusebius’ creed with just one change added. Constantine asked that the word

homoousios be added to the creed, effectively defeating the Arians at the

Council.

Why would Constantine, who personally didn’t care or understand the

difference between homoousios and homoiousios announce so forwardly that he

supported one side of the argument over the other? Before, and during the

Council, Emperor Constantine was being advised by Bishop Hosius of Cordova

(of the Western Roman Empire). While between two hundred fifty and three

hundred bishops attended the Council, less than ten bishops from the Western

Empire attended the Council of Niceae. This was primarily because Arius’

influence did not reach the Western part of the Empire. The Western Empire

already followed an anti-Arian belief116

. Constantine himself had just gained

control of the entire Roman Empire after defeating his joint Emperor Licinius at

the Battle of Chrysopolis in 324 C.E.117

The East and West Roman Empire had

been at war for eighteen years and Constantine, as the first sole Emperor of

Rome in nearly forty years, wanted to make sure he could keep peace between

the Eastern and Western Empires, having a unified religion and doctrine would help

keep the peace between east and west. Constantine came to understand that with the

Western Empire already holding an anti-Arian belief, it would be in his best political

interest to lean towards an anti-Arian stance.

116

Rubenstein. 64 117

Grant. 237

30

Furthermore, the christology of the anti-Arian position gave more power to the

church’s clergy and put the clergy in a better position to help maintain the peace

in the empire.

“If Jesus’ life and character were supposed to serve ordinary Christians as a usable model of behavior, the principal mission of the clergy would be to help people transform themselves, not maintain theological and political unity throughout the empire…The Church he [Constantine] Needed was one that would help him keep order among ordinary folk: people who would never become immortal unless God decided for reasons of His own to save them.

118”

Making Jesus homoousios with God put Jesus at a level that the followers

couldn’t reach on their own without the clergy’s ability to give them the

sacraments. With the Church able to control access to Jesus and salvation,

Constantine would be able to trade the commoners of the Empire eternal

salvation for stability and peace. If he went with the Arian view, making Jesus

lesser than god, this would have made Jesus accessible to the commoner

without the help of the church, removing the church’s ability to control the

laypeople. If people did not need the church for salvation but could reach

salvation on their own, the clergy loose the ability to police the commoners. While

Constantine had no theological basis for his desire for the bishops to add

homoousios to Bishop Eusebius of Caesarea’s creed, he believed that the

addition of the word homoousios to the theological doctrine would help unify his

newly reunited Roman Empire, and would allow the clergy to better assist him in

controlling the Roman masses.

118

Rubenstein. 64

31

After creating the Nicean Creed, and deeming Arianism heretical, the

Council then moved to the topic of Easter, determining that all of Christendom

should celebrate Easter on the same day, a date calculated separately from the

Jewish calendar.

“Relative to the most holy day of Easter, it was determined by common consent that it should be proper that all should celebrate it on one and the same day everywhere. For what can be more appropriate, or what more solemn, than that this feast from which we have received an obvious reason among all?

119”

Constantine in his letter to all the churches of the Empire continues to

strive for consistency and unity throughout the Catholic Church. As with the

question of Jesus’ divinity, Constantine believed that having a unified date for

Eater throughout the Empire would help keep peace in the Church.

While part of Constantine’s reason for wanting a unified date for Easter

was to help unify the Eastern and Western Christians in the Empire, his, and the

Councils decision on the Subject of the Dating of Easter was also done to

distance the Christians from a different group, the Jews. Throughout the

existence of the Roman Empire, the Jews and Romans had had an uneasy

relationship. Between 66 C.E. and 135 C.E. The Jews of the Judea providence

had held three separate revolts against their Roman conquers. While Judaism

was tolerated, many leaders of the Roman Empire saw Judaism as problematic

to the Empire saying it was incompatible with civic cult120

. Because of this

Emperors, such as Hadrian, dealt with the Jews harsher than other conquered

119 Scholasticus. 28. 120

Digeser, Elizabeth DePalma. The Making of a Christian Empire: Lactantius & Rome. Ithaca, NY: Cornell UP, 2000. Print. 120

32

territories121

. After Constantine’s conversion to Christianity the Jews were the only

religious group that he publicly opposed122

most likely because he, like many

Christians of his time saw the Jews as the murderers of the savior123

.

Constantine’s goal was to distance his new unified religion from Judaism124

, a

religion that had been stigmatized throughout the Empire for centuries. Splitting

Christianity from the stigmatized Judaism would help improve the image of

Christianity throughout the Empire as not just a sub sect of Judaism but its own

religion.

At the root of the Melitius Schism is a political power struggle for who

rightfully held the title of Metropolitan Bishop of Alexandria, and all the privileges

that came with being the leader of one of the three major metropolitan dieses.

Melitius’s coming from small town diocese of Lycopolis usurped the Patriarch

during the exile of Bishop Peter, performing the duties of metropolitan bishop

while Peter was not there to do them. However, Melitius refused to give up his

power of “Bishop of Alexandria,” both when Bishop Peter returned from his exile

and later when Bishop Alexander was named the New Bishop of Alexandria. It is

evident that Melitius was not just attempting to help a Christian community in

need, but rather wanted the political powers that came with being a metropolitan

bishop. Likewise, Bishop Alexander, the rightfully appointed Bishop of Alexandria

121

Grant, 79 122

Digeser. 122 123

Scholasticus. 28 124

Bradshaw, Paul F., and Lawrence A. Hoffman. Passover and Easter: Origin and History to Modern times. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame, 1999. Print. 92

33

wanted the political prestige that came with his title, and that he considered was

rightfully his.

Constantine himself had fought for several years against Maxentius, an

emperor who like Melitius attempted to usurp a title that was not rightfully his.

However, Those at the Council of Niceae allowed Mellitus to stay in the clergy

but forced him to take the title of Bishop of Lycopolis and disallowed him from

ordaining any new ministers. The council also re-ordained all of the clergy that

had been ordained by Mellitus.

The Council’s ruling on the Mellitus Schism, and their decrees in the

Eighth and Nineteenth Canons demonstrate the Council’s willingness to forgive

and reaccept large groups of heretics back to the Catholic Church. Those at the

Council realized that the leaders of the schismatic churches had large followings.

If Constintine wanted a truly unified Church than he must be willing to accept

large branched of heretics back into the Catholic Church. Furthermore in the

case of the Melitians, and the Novantianists there was no theological difference

between the Catholic Church and the schisms, the differences being only based

off of political power and the discipline on lapsed. Reaccepting these sects back

into the church was supposed to allow for the Church Bishops to focus on their

clerical duties and not have to worry about competing with rival sects of the

church but rather having these sects return to the Catholic church would stop

inner city feuds from disturbing the peace of the Empire. (While this was the

basis for the decisional thoughts, historically It did not pan out like this, Melitius

died soon after the council and his followers joined forces with the Arians and

34

continued to exist well after the Council of Niceae,125

Novantianists didn’t agree to

reunify with the Catholic Church after the Council and still existed as a subset of

the Church up into the seventh century)126

.

While creating a creed that was universally followed by all Christians in the

Empire was imperative to creating a unified and peaceful church, making sure

that the Catholic church was also well organized was also key to the success of

church. With Canons four, five, six, seven, fifteen, and sixteen Constantine and

the Council at Niceae created a well organized structure for political power inside

of the clergy. These canons laid out how the clergy was to be structured and run

and laid out punishments for those who broke canon laws, usually with dismissal

from the clergy or excommunication. Constantine had seen first hand in the both

the success and failure of the Tetrarchy how important it is to have a strong line

of succession. The council producing these canons created a system that would

allow for peace and uneventful succession inside the clergy.

One of the benefits of the homoousios Christology is that it gives power to

the Clergy to control the sacraments and therefore control access to Christ. By

giving the Clergy the power over the salvation of commoners in the Empire the

Clergy were able help maintain order among those in the Empire looking for

salvation. Controlling the salvation of the Empire was an important duty that only

the righteous could do. To make sure that only those who could properly give

the sacraments could join the clergy the Council produced Canons One, Two,

125

Rubenstein. 105 126

Chapman, John. "Novatian and Novatianism." The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 11.

New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1911. 25 Apr. 2013

<http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11138a.htm>.

35

Three, Nine, Ten, and Seventeen. These Canons gave regulations for those

who were in, or wished to join the Clergy. If the office was to maintain its power

over the masses of the Empire, than those who controlled the offices must

maintain a level of dignity over the commoners.

Several canons created by the Council of Niceae dealt with the re-

admittance to the church of those who had had lapses in faith during the

persecution by the Roman Empire. Much like the heretical sects, the Council

determined to allow those who lapsed back into the Church. Much of the

church’s power came from the Religion’s growing numbers. Furthermore it was in

the apostolic tradition to convert members to Christianity127

. Not banishing those

who had lapsed in faith kept the church’s numbers growing and continued with

the Christian traditions passed down by the apostles.

In the early parts of the fourth century Emperor Constantine and Emperor

Maxentius were engaging in open warfare over who would control the Roman

Empire. The warfare ended when Constantine defeated and killed Maxentius at

the Battle of the Milvian Bridge128. While Constantine’s army was much smaller

than Maxentius, “Constantine experienced a “Vision of the cross that foretold his

victory.”129 Because Constantine had defeated his rival under the banner of

Christianity, Constantine himself converted to the religion, gave massive land

grants, and patronized many of the churches leaders130. While this was great for

the Christians who had been getting persecuted for the past several centuries,

127

Matthew. The Harper Collins Study Bible. New York: Harper Collins, 2006. Print. 128 Grant. 228 129 Stephenson. 135 130 Ehrman.

36

there was no set “Christian Doctrine,” that is, the no officially recognized set of

beliefs among the different sects of Christians. Constantine believed that if

Christianity was to become a legal religion in the empire then it must have one

universal, theology. In order to do this, in the year 325 C.E., Constantine called

for a Great Council of all the church leaders to meet in Niceae131.

The Council of Niceae created a doctrinal creed that linked Christians from

East to West together allowing for there to be one true definition for what it was

to be Christian. Creating this creed unified the church and disposed of all

heretics within the Christian Church. With one set of beliefs there would be no

more fighting between Christians over the nature of Jesus, but only Peace and

prosperity132

. The Council also created Canon Law that allowed for peaceful

succession of Clerical ranks making sure that Bishops like Melitius, would never

be able to usurp the metropolitan see without the support of all the regional

bishops. We will never know if God spoke to Constantine before the Battle of

Milvian Bridge or if the Holy Spirit controlled the voting at the Council of Niceae.

However, when we look at the outcome and political reasoning behind the

decisions made at the Council of Niceae we can see that the creeds, canons and

declarations passed by the council were done so to increase the stability and

security of the newly unified Roman Empire.

131 Mathews, Shailer. “The Beginning of a New Catholic Unity.” The Biblical World 41.1 (1913). 8 132

This didn’t actually happen. Arius continued preaching and several years after the

council Constantine felt sympathetic towards several Arians and had them re-

communicated to the church. It is rumored that an Arian Priest baptized Constantine on

his deathbed.

37

Bibliography

Bettenson, Henry Scowcroft., and Chris Maunder. Documents of the Christian

Church. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2011. Print.

Bradshaw, Paul F., and Lawrence A. Hoffman. Passover and Easter: Origin and

38

History to Modern times. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame, 1999.

Print.

Bradshaw, Paul F., and Lawrence A. Hoffman. Passover and Easter: The

Symbolic Structuring of Sacred Seasons. Notre Dame, IN: University of

Notre Dame, 1999. Print.

"Canons of the Council of Arles." Cua.edu. Trans. GLT. Catholic University. Web.

10 Apr. 2013.

"Canons of the Council of Elvira." Cua.edu. Trans. GLT. Catholic University.

Web. 10 Apr. 2013.

Chapman, John. "Novatian and Novatianism." The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol.

11. New York: Robert Appleton, 1911. Web. 25 Apr. 2013.

<http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11138a.htm>.

"The Council of Nicea." The Council of Nicea. Columbia University. Web. 18 Apr.

2013.

Davis, Leo Donald. The First Seven Ecumenical Councils (325-787): Their

History and Theology. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical, 1990. Print.

Digeser, Elizabeth DePalma. The Making of a Christian Empire: Lactantius &

Rome. Ithaca, NY: Cornell UP, 2000. Print.

Ehrman, Bart D. The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early

Christian Writings. New York: Oxford UP, 2008. Print.

Eusebius, and Arthur Cushman McGiffert. The History of the Church. Stilwell,

Ks.: Digireads.com Pub., 2005. Print.

Eusebius. The Life of the Blessed Emperor Constantine: From AD 306 to AD

39

337. Merchantville, NJ: Evolution Pub., 2998. Print.

Frend, W. H. C. The Rise of Christianity. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984. Print.

Gagarin, Michael, ed. "Tetrarchy." The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Greece

and Rome. Oxford University Press. Web. 24 Apr. 2013.

Grant, Michael. The Roman Emperors: A Biographical Guide to the Rulers of

Imperial Rome, 31 BC-AD 476. New York: Barnes & Noble, 1997. Print.

The Harper Collins Study Bible. New York: Harper Collins, 2006. Print.

"Homoiousian." Oxford Reference. Oxford University Press. Web. 27 Mar. 2013.

"Homoousian." Oxford Reference. Oxford University Press. Web. 27 Mar. 2013.

"In Hoc Signo Vinces." Merriam-Webster.Com. Merriam-Webster. Web. 24 Apr.

2013.

Jenkins, Philip. Jesus Wars: How Four Patriarchs, Three Queens, and Two

Emperors Decided What Christians Would Believe for the next 1,500

Years. New York: HarperOne, 2010. Print.

McKenzie, Judith. The Architecture of Alexandria and Egypt, C. 300 B.C. to A.D.

700. New Haven, CT: Yale UP, 2007. Print.

Pelikan, Jaroslav. The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of

Doctrine. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1971. Print.

"Quartodecimanism." The Concise Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church.

Oxford University Press. Web. 09 Apr. 2013.

Robert, Grant M. "Religion and Politics at the Council at Nicaea." The Journal of

Religion 55.1 (1975): 1-12. JSTOR. Web. 27 Jan. 2013.

<http://www.jstor.org/stable/1202069>.

40

Rubenstein, Richard E. When Jesus Became God: The Struggle to Define

Christianity during the Last Days of Rome. New York: Harcourt, 2000.

Print.

Schaff, Philip, and Henry Wace. A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene

Fathers of the Christian Church. Vol. 14. New York: Christian Literature,

1890. Print. Second.

Scholasticus, Socrates. The Ecclesiastical History. [Sl.]: NuVision Publications,

LLC, 2007. Print.

Shailer, Matthew. "The Beginin Og a New Catholic Unity." The Biblical World

41.1 (1913). Print.

Speidel, M. P. "Maxentius and His "Equites Singulares" in the Battle at the

Milvian Bridge." Classical Antiquity 5.2 (1986): 253-62. JSTOR. Web. 24

Apr. 2013. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/25010851>.

"St. Alexander." Oxford Reference. Oxford University Press. Web. 27 Mar. 2013.

Stephenson, Paul. Constantine: Roman Emperor, Christian Victor. New York:

Overlook, 2010. Print.

Telfer, W. "Meletius of Lycopolis and Episcopal Succession in Egypt." The

Theological Review 48.4 (1955): 227-37. JSTOR. Web. 27 Jan. 2013.

<http://www.jstor.org/stable/1508406>.

Vasiliev, Alexander A. History of the Byzantine Empire: Vol 1&2, 324-1453,

Unabridged. CreateSpace Independent Platform, 2012. Print.

41

Wace, Henry. "Council of Ancyra (A.D. 314)." Newadvent.com. Trans. Henry

Percival. Ed. Philip Schaff. Web. 24 Apr. 2013.

<http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3802.htm>.